And there's more MSM news: Saudi Arabia Warns of Economic Fallout if Congress Passes 9/11 Bill WASHINGTON Saudi Arabia has told the Obama administration and members of Congress that it will sell off hundreds of billions of dollars worth of American assets held by the kingdom if Congress passes a bill that would allow the Saudi government to be held responsible in American courts for any role in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. The Obama administration has lobbied Congress to block the bills passage, according to administration officials and congressional aides from both parties [what I keep saying, the Obama administration's criminal complicity in the 9/11 coverup], and the Saudi threats have been the subject of intense discussions in recent weeks between lawmakers and officials from the State Department and the Pentagon. The officials have warned senators of diplomatic and economic fallout from the legislation. Adel al-Jubeir, the Saudi foreign minister, delivered the kingdoms message personally last month during a trip to Washington, telling lawmakers that Saudi Arabia would be forced to sell up to $750 billion in treasury securities and other assets in the United States before they could be in danger of being frozen by American courts. Several outside economists are skeptical that the Saudis will follow through, saying that such a sell-off would be difficult to execute and would end up crippling the kingdoms economy. But the threat is another sign of the escalating tensions between Saudi Arabia and the United States. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/w...-congress-passes-9-11-bill.html?AID=7236&_r=1 Kevin Ryan was right on the money.
I disagree, the 28 pages should have been made public with the entire Senate Intelligence Committee report irrelevant of the Saudis. If the Saudi government/royal family were involved in any way in 9/11, they are the enemy as they are clearly implicated in an act of war, not friends of the US. Covering up the Saudi role in 9/11 is treason as described by Article III Section 3 of the Constitution. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
I think they probably should pull out anyway.. Being called "terrorists" is extremely insulting in the face of the facts. Saudi Arabia can buy what ever goods, services and technology elsewhere. Conspiracy theorists have poisoned the oldest and most stable alliance the US has in the ME.
Never met anyone in the CD business who would allow buildings to burn out of control for hours before setting off the charges. Those fires were out of control therefore there was no "controlled demolition" in any of the world trade center buildings. The OP topic is about the cover up of the support that the terrorists had here in the USA prior to 9/11. That is a legitimate question for Bob Graham to raise and it deserves to be addressed by this administration IMO. Whatever it uncovers is something that We the People have a right to know. Our government should not be in the business of aiding and abetting those who provided support to those terrorists. If it turns out not to be the case then sobeit but let's have an inquiry and deal with it openly and honestly. There are enough other idiotic conspiracy theories about 9/11 to not need another one. File a FIOA request and let's see what it says.
Of course, blame the "conspiracy theorists", leave the poor Saudis alone and especially leave the US government who have been covering up 9/11 since 9/11 (and before) alone. Let's kill the "conspiracy theorists", they probably did 9/11 anyway. Jeeez the mentality is just so incredible.
Where's your proof? 9-11 wasn't a Saudi conspiracy.. and the 28 redacted pages will prove it. - - - Updated - - - Do you know any Saudis? Do you know any of the SAG? Have you lived in kingdom? Your hysteria aside, you have been duped by propagandists..
Neither did I and so? Yeah that must be it and there was no coverup of 9/11 either, so everything is cool, nothing to even think about. The US government said there wasn't any so you can trust them to tell you the truth. All of 9/11 needs to be addressed, all we have gotten so far are lies and coverups. That's what most intelligent people who have given even a passing thought on 9/11 have been saying since 9/11, welcome to America. Yeah that's called TREASON (Article III Section 3 of the Constitution). And I believe the punishment for treason if found guilty is still hanging. It's already the case, pay attention. A coverup is complicity, it's also treason, the coverup by the last two administrations has been exposed in no uncertain term, all that's missing is a lot of detail. Absolutely, the conspiracy FACTS speak for themselves, there is a US government CONSPIRACY to coverup 9/11, it's not even arguable. This is a case of a conspiracy theory that turns out to be FACT, not that there ever was any question about it, at least not to those who are fully aware. That's already been done, the 28 pages were classified by the Bush and Obama administrations and any FOIA on the subject was and will be rejected by the US courts. It's up to Congress and the Obama administration to declassify the 28 pages and investigate a lot further. But the Obama administration is stonewalling, what else is new?
I don't personally have any but those in a position to know claim to have it. If the Saudis funded any part of 9/11, and all indicators show that to be the case, they are complicit in the 9/11 conspiracy. Why are you defending the Saudis, are you a Saudi, an American or other? Do you? Why would I need to know any Saudis, SAG or have to live in the KSA to know there's a 9/11/Saudi connection coverup? What do your questions have to do with anything? I don't have any "hysteria", do you? If I post a valid topic also currently being covered by the mainstream media it means I'm hysterical? You really are off the deep end aren't you? Are you that much of a cognitive dissonant that you need to defend the Saudis? Or perhaps you're a Saudi national, in that case I understand. Otherwise I think it's you who's been duped by the biggest propagandists on the planet, the US government.
I'm just dying to find out about the Silverstein/Saudi connection ... or perhaps it was 2 different plots going on the same day ... coincidences do happen I guess ...
Yeah that must be it, it really has nothing to do with 9/11. This guy too. [video=youtube;ItE28oeMnas]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItE28oeMnas[/video] And this guy: [video=youtube;X9GxTYSAP4o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9GxTYSAP4o[/video] They must all be hysterical and seeking attention. Ok now that you know the agenda there's nothing more for you here.
To the rational individual CD was impractical, unnecessary & illogical. There are so many problems with the story it is virtually implausible. - - - Updated - - - He's a politician after all.
Silverstein did it on behalf of the Saudis so 'da jooz' could invade Iraq...or sumpin'. Whatever, it's the fault of Bush and Cheney somehow that hasn't ever been made clear (like all 9/11 bat-(*)(*)(*)(*) crazy stories like nukes and CD).
LOLOL 'Obama's Saudi 9/11 cover up'??? So, it's Obama's fault now? The politicking just gets dumber as each day passes.
Given that there are perfectly logical engineering explanations for the collapse of all 3 WTC buildings there was absolutely no need whatsoever for any CD. The CD scenarios are just the product of the fevered imaginations of conspiracy theorists who don't know anything at all about engineering and strengths of materials.
I have yet to see one though. NIST was tasked with the explanations and as for the twin towers, their only "perfectly logical engineering explanation" was that it was "inevitable". Well a 6 year old could have explained that. As for WTC7, their explanation was based on all sorts of shenanigans (including deliberate omissions of key structural components, changing various data to try to fit a round peg into a square hole, obfuscations, lies, non-explanations, failure to adhere to investigation standards, proclamations of ignorance, computer simulation cartoons that look nothing like the actual event, etc.) that have nothing to do any "perfectly logical engineering explanation". You're right about that there was no "need" at least not for ordinary Americans. Yeah that's it, all these people know nothing but internet jockeys armed with a keyboard and an opinion know everything and are always superior to experts. [video=youtube;ANYMXwFK0C8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANYMXwFK0C8[/video] In any case this thread is about Senator Bob Graham and 9/11, not about CDs or the "collapse" of 3 buildings on 9/11.
As someone with an engineering education I had no problem whatsoever understanding the concepts in the NIST reports. Yes, they did have to do some "dumbing down" to try and explain it to the general public but the math all added up given the structures, weights, heating and time scales. No "round pegs" were "forced" into "square holes". That is just a failure to comprehend what they were reporting. As far as Bob Graham goes any time anyone kicks over the 9/11 anthill everything is regurgitated ad nauseum.
As someone with an engineering education, I have no problem whatsoever seeing the immense NIST fraud. In fact, if I take away everything I learned in my engineering and physics classes about a half century ago, I still see the immense NIST fraud just based on common sense. Funny you should say that, other OCT defenders claim it wasn't meant for the general public. The other problem with your claim is twofold. One, you have no idea what all the data that NIST used was because NIST deliberately refused FOIA requests to release all their data citing that releasing it "would jeopardize public safety". And two, the data that NIST did publish EXCLUDES key structural components and juxtaposed and false data that NIST admitted to so it can't possible "add up" to anything that makes sense. True, not if you know nothing about the details of the NIST reports or you wear blinders. No I understand fully NIST's agenda. You don't need to be an engineer to see the fraud it is quite graphic. [video=youtube;pmdcMb5D9gM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmdcMb5D9gM&feature=youtu.be[/video] Yeah, boring isn't it? Ok so there's nothing here for you either, so why post here? You obviously have nothing to discuss, you bought the whole shebang, lock, stock and barrel, stick with it, you seem to find comfort in the OCT and "find" no problems with it.
I never said I had any problem comprehending any part of the WTC7 collapse, where did you get that idea from? Why are you still posting in this thread? Isn't it boring for you? Do you have any point to make?
The problems in logic with the story are insurmountable, and it is quite obvious that 9/11 truth will not discuss these problems. Anyone who is unwilling to discuss the inconvenient is not really interested in learning. - - - Updated - - - All of it from my experience. He doesn't want to read the truth, as he has an agenda that is not interested in the facts. Those defending controlled demolition obviously have no experience or education in the field (thankfully, as I wouldn't want truthers designing high-rise buildings). Cry, 'Shill!' and let slip the lies of propaganda!'.
Bob is not an investigative journalist or attorney ... and I'm sure he will remind you that the subject is about Bob Graham ... (even though he derails the thread constantly) ... but you don't want to learn anything and have nothing to add because you are an OTC SHILL ...
I already did but you ignored it. Instead of acknowledging that the NIST computer simulation cartoon of the WTC7 "collapse" (there are actually two of them) and the NIST graphic do not even remotely represent any of the many WTC7 collapse videos, you asked me this irrelevant question: Which I answered and asked you 3 questions which you also ducked. Now you're asking me for "credible substantiation" for an allegation which is right under your nose. What part of the side by side comparisons make sense to you Mr. Engineering Education? What kind of possible "concept" from NIST is that all about? A caricature? It's not even that, it's a computer simulation that NIST claims a 25 s analysis took up to 8 weeks to complete. I have a 45+ year career as consultant in commercial computer systems designs and programming for some of the largest corporations on the planet. If that's the result of their "computer simulation", it has to be a really bad joke. The simulation and graphic only scratch the surface of the fraud but it seems your blinders prevent you from seeing the obvious (or you pretend). I already posted quite a bit on the subject but you already believe that based on your "engineering education" you had "no problem whatsoever understanding the concepts in the NIST reports".and that NIST provided a "perfectly logical engineering explanation". If you're really interested (and based on your posts it seems you're quite settled with what you think you know), you can either go back and read my prior posts on the subject or do the research yourself (unless your blinders prevent you from doing so). This is still the thread titled Senator Bob Graham and 9/11 so I won't be posting any more on this off topic subject here. I might however consider starting a thread on the NIST fraud. Not for you of course, you already know it all so you don't need to learn anything more. The last time I did that in another forum it took 3 posts just for a condensed summary. That would probably double today.
